Hello All:

One more question on exporting data:

How can I put titles for the columns?

Can I, for example, export the field names?

Sam

SamMc wrote:

Straight export to text, no. There has been some discussion here about
exporting to merge files and at least one other format (which escapes me
at the moment), but I have yet to experiment with them. My only experience
with needing and getting field names is accommodated by exporting to HTML,
then opening the file in Excel.

One workaround for exporting to text would be to have a record that
contains the field names as record data, then make sure that record is
part of the found set and is the first one in the order.

Matt

I thought about a record that contains the field names. My observation,
though, is that the numeric fields do not export alphanumeric
descriptions entered in them.

In other words, if I have a field called temperature og "number" type,
and if I enter in a special record "Temp" to make it into a header when
exporting, I end up getting a blank in the export.

Perhaps there is a way around this?

Sam

In article <SyeEe.35$in2.13@trndny05>, I'm (AT) Witz (DOT) end says...
Lol.

Before you go this route its worth experimenting with merge files.

They are csv with a field name header row.

Why reinvent the wheel?

In article <1122069591.861550.180760 (AT) g49g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com>,
"SamMc" <FMP_account (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Export in MERGE file format. This is a CSV file that has field names in
the first row. Works fine. No need for any other fiddling around.

Bill Collins

--
For email, remove invalid.

In article <MPG.1d4b228d38ad7ab7989c1d (AT) shawnews (DOT) vf.shawcable.net>, 42
<nospam (AT) nospam (DOT) com> wrote:

Exactly. A merge export (.mer file type) *is* a csv file with the
addition of the field name row. Open one in a text editor and you will
see not one jot of difference (between .mer and .csv).

I've been exporting these files to supply to Excel-besotted people for
years without a single error or complaint.

Steve Brown

Bill wrote:

Export the same data set from FileMaker to merge file and to HTML table
file and do couple of direct comparisons.

From Excel, open the .mer file.
1. Tell Excel it is a delimited file.
2. Tell Excel the delimiter is a comma.
3. Click finish.

At this point I have a sheet displaying my data, with field names in the
first row, all columns at default column width. To actually view the
results,

4. Select all of the columns,
5. Double-click on a column divider in the row header to open the columns
up to data width.

If I want to visually differentiate the field names from the data (and I do)

6. Select the first row.
7. Click Bold.

Now from Excel, open the .html file

At this point I have a sheet displaying my data, with field names in the
first row. The field names are already bolded, and the columns are already
at data width.

After "Open File", FIVE to SEVEN additional steps to open the merge, NO
additional steps to open the HTML.

Now let's drag and drop the two files onto the Excel icon:

The .html file opens in exactly the same state as in the previous test.

The .mer opens with the entirety of one record in one cell, including
delimiting characters.

Sidebar question: Why does .mer come out with both quotes and commas
inconsistently applied? Field names have just commas, data has both commas
and quotes.

The above obtained using WXP and Excel 2003. Mac or later version mileage
may vary, but for the moment, I'll go with the HTML Table export every time.

Matt

In article <JIxEe.982$Sr2.225@trndny03>, I'm (AT) Witz (DOT) end says...
If the holy grail is bold headings when you want to open it in Excel
sure.

If your exporting the data with a header row to simplify field mapping
when you import it into something else (be it an outlook address book,
some 3rd party shipping software, accounting software, etc) then html is
useless.

Well I guess you *could* open the html in excel and then resave it as a
csv... but I'm sure we all agree that's pretty pointless.

42 wrote:

I mentioned bold headings only because HTML provides that, which is something I happen to prefer. That was only a small part of what I described. The Holy Grail, as I read the original post, is getting field names into Excel from FM export. Nothing was said about Outlook or field mapping to export it for use elsewhere.

The question was how to get field names into Excel: I provided a comparison of the relative convenience of opening a csv file in Excel versus opening an HTML file. Pardon the assumption, but I think it reasonable to assume that SamMc wants to be able to read the data in the cells.

Even if we remove bolding the field names, we still have five steps after "File Open" to get csv into an Excel sheet in which the cells are are readable. HTML requires no additional steps. "File Open" by itself does the job.

Thus, for purposes of the original question and only the original question, exporting to HTML for opening in Excel is more convenient than csv, No Additional Steps to Five. Fewer strokes, just like golf.

Matt

In article <t5CEe.134$in2.12@trndny05>, I'm (AT) Witz (DOT) end says...

Hmmm... counting 3 steps to resize the columns is also pushing it I
think.

That just leaves the original extra steps during the initial import.
Now, my copy of excel does that by default... I have to push Finish.

Iirc, if I'm smart enough to name the file ".csv" when i export it from
FM i don't even have to do that much.

You may want to re-read the original question. He never mentioned Excel.

-regards,
Dave